Six Senses Eco Symposium: A Conversation with Climate Change Advisor Mark Lynas

Photo: Rich Morgan

Mark Lynas is the Maldives' Government Advisor on Climate Change. That's a massive achievement for a 37-year-old history and politics graduate. He has written three books, and soon a forth, which have tackled some of the fundamental issues within the climate change debate. Mark Lynas is in an important and influential position within a government that has climate change on top of its list of priorities.

He is not, in my opinion, a traditional environmentalist, and I mean that in no negative way. He has some perspectives that at first seem controversial, but after a little context and reflection, make good sense. I asked him about his thoughts on the symposium as a whole, and here's his take on the offsetting question that I and many others asked:

"I am not into luxury travel, I think most environmentalist would say this kind of tourism shouldn't even exist, but the change needs to start at both ends. This resort has the resources to make decarbonizing a reality and so it should do it. A top-end, celebrity-endorsed message can set a powerful example".

"There is a misconception around offsetting; the idea that it is simply a way of avoiding responsibility is not true. In fact, what you find is that those people that do offset become more motivated to address their impact. I believe we are all environmentalists; the issue is not one you can choose to ignore, it's bigger than that".

Photo: Rich Morgan

There is an approach to GHG emission reduction that has been gathering favor and momentum in the past few years. Contraction and convergence is an idea created by the Global Commons Institute and strongly advocated by Aubrey Meyer. It proposes that a global cap be imposed that all nations set as a limit to the overall emissions they produce. Over time, excessive nations begin reducing their emissions, while conversely the emissions of those nations that are negative to the the boundary increase.

This produces a global decrease, which is the contraction and a merging of fossil fuel rights, the convergence. After this convergence is met, all nations begin reducing their emissions in a united effort. It is popular because it is seen as realistic and also based in equity that the convention would have you believe is just. Mark puts a spin on this, which I have never considered. He says:

"What's going on here is the opposite of C&C. A nation that should by that model be arguing to increase its carbon rights is in fact working to eliminate them all together. GHG emissions are bad, and there are no equal rights to do something that is bad. We should keep the low-producing nations low and decrease the high ones. The countries leading the way in decarbonisation are increasing; additional to the Maldives, Costa Rica is aiming to be carbon neutral by 2021, and Ethiopia, one of the world's poorest countries, is planning to be carbon neutral by 2025. The developing world is leading the way in this."

It is a powerful argument and makes me see C&C in a slightly different light. It is arrogant to think that developing nations would even want fossil fuel rights. It's comparable to addiction: it is better to stop early, when its easier and less painful, than to gain a shared dependence and have to attend some kind of group therapy with the rest of the world, only to be back where you started. I can in defense, still see a problem. For the nations that do want equal rights, they must be given. Equity is a right, but an emphasis on whether it's worth it is far more important.

Photo: Rich Morgan

What strikes me is that Mark is many things that I am not in terms
of his environmental perspectives, but he does a very good job of
making you question those principles by being painfully matter-of-fact
about it all. For him, peak energy is not an issue or a fact; what's
important is that we need to phase out our fossil fuel reliance
regardless of what reserves are left. He's pro nuclear, which is a
decision I have yet to make, but for him it seems to be a question of
necessity more than politics or possible consequences. Mark Lynas is
representative of a new generation of environmental commentators who
have developed in a different world than those before them. Says Mark:

"We live on a very different planet to the one that traditional
environmentalism began in. There is little left that is natural. We
have influenced most aspects of our environment and changed it to suit
our needs. In terms of what needs to happen for change, then getting
China on board is key. They have 20+ nuclear power stations in
production and substantial renewable projects in development, once they
begin to realise those efforts and momentum builds, along with
countries like India getting involved, we will see some real changes. It
is America that will be last in this. Their government and system is so
corrupted by other factors that no one within it will make the change."

Photo: Herman Luyken

I disagree with such a dismissive perspective on equitable models because I think they do have something to offer, and I am convinced that peak oil is and will have some massive impacts on economies and initiatives in years to come. What I can't deny is that all these things are really just distracting from what's important right now, and that is getting CO2 out of the atmosphere. Our responses need to be quick and concise to reduce atmospheric levels to 350 ppm, and on those issues Mark has an uncanny ability to sweep the bullshit out of the way and make the central issue abundantly clear.